Cato Institute

Cato Institute

Background

The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank based in Washington, D.C. founded in January 1977 by Edward H. Crane, Murray Rothbard, and Charles Koch, chairman of the “board and chief executive officer of Koch Industries, Inc. [1]

According to their website, “The mission of the Cato Institute is to originate, disseminate, and increase understanding of public policies based on the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace. Our vision is to create free, open, and civil societies founded on libertarian principles.” [2]

History

The Cato Institute was originally incorporated (PDF) on December 19, 1974, under the name “Charles Koch Foundation,” with the original directors listed as Charles Koch, George Pearson, and Roger MacBride. It shared the same address as Koch Industries in Wichita, Kansas. [3]

At the same time, George Pearson filed the organization's application for nonprofit status with the IRS (PDF), anticipating initial contributions of $40,000 in funds from Charles Koch, the Fred C. Koch Trust, and potentially the Fred C. Koch Foundation, as well as 10,000 to 15,000 shares of non-voting common stock of Koch Industries, as well as potentially non-voting preferred stock. [4]

The Cato Institute took on its current name in 1977. It began with headquarters in San Francisco, a staff of three, and $500,000 in financial backing provided via Charles G. Koch, according to the Washington Post.[5]

Internal Conflict

In 2012, the Koch Brothers and Ed Crane of the Cato Institute had a “bitter falling-out over management and philosophical differences.” The Koch Brothers, who controlled roughly half of the Cato Institute through “shareholder seats,” had decided to sue the Cato Institute to gain control over an additional seat of a shareholder who had died, which would give the Kochs more control within the organization. [6]

“Charles G. Koch has filed a lawsuit as part of an effort to gain control of the Cato Institute, which he co-founded with me in 1977. While Mr. Koch and entities controlled by him have supported the Cato Institute financially since that time, Mr. Koch and his affiliates have exercised no significant influence over the direction or management of the Cato Institute, or the work done here.” [7]

The New York Times reported the Koch Brothers had long attempted to install their own people on the Cato Institute's 16-member board, to establish a “more direct pipeline between Cato and the family’s Republican political outlets, including groups that Democrats complain have mounted a multimillion-dollar assault on President Obama.” This had caused tensions inside the governing structure, as Cato officials said this threatened their reputation for independent research. [8]

The Kochs eventually relented on the condition that Ed Crane retire, who was later replaced by John Allison, reported the New Yorker. It also resulted in a revamp of the Cato's organizational structure, which had based ownership on a share structure. David Koch would remain on the board, but not his brother Charles. Bruce Bartlett, conservative economist and historian, said that the Kochs are ”[P]utting in place a structure that will gradually erode Cato’s independence and move it closer to the American Enterprise Institute and Heritage Foundation.” [9]

Greenpeace reported that before the attempted Koch takeover, Cato was seen as a “Relatively independent think tank, willing to criticize both democrat and republican administrations,” but that the Kochs had wanted “the power to fold Cato into their suite of other front groups, making it another Koch-controlled cog in the republican political machine.” [10]

Stance on Climate Change

“Global warming is indeed real, and human activity has been a contributor since 1975. But global warming is also a very complicated and difficult issue that can provoke very unwise policy in response to political pressure. Although there are many different legislative proposals for substantial reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, there is no operational or tested suite of technologies that can accomplish the goals of such legislation. Fortunately, and contrary to much of the rhetoric surrounding climate change, there is ample time to develop such technologies, which will require substantial capital investment by individuals.” [11]

2001

In 2001, the Cato Institute released a “Handbook for Congress” that suggested that global warming cannot be stopped in the near-term:

“No known mechanism can stop global warming in the near term. International agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, would have no detectable effect on average temperature within any reasonable policy time frame of 50 years or so, even with full compliance.” [12]

Electric Vehicles/Alternative Fuels

2016

“The real reason for all the scandalous regulations and subsidies designed to shove us into underpowered mini-cars has nothing to do with 'saving the planet.' It’s all about doling out lucrative gifts (emissions credits, grants and subsides) to politically-favored companies who try to sell us unwanted electric cars or biofuels while the government punishes taxpayers and companies that produce vehicles American consumers really want” — Alan Reynolds, Cato Institute senior fellow. [41]

Actions

February 8, 2018

Three former Cato Institute employees said that president emeritus Ed Crane had sexually harassed them while they worked at the think tank, Politico reported. Crane denied the reported incidents, or said he didn't recall them. He also declined to comment on whether he was involved in a legal settlement for a sexual harassment claim by a former employee in 2012. The events described to Politico had not been publicly reported before, and included numerous reported instances of alleged sexual harassment. [52]

“Rather than pay the rest of the world to look the other way, the president should revise, or better yet, rescind that promise.

And now is the time to do that, before the grand signing ceremony of the Paris Climate Agreement that is scheduled for April 22, Earth Day, at the UN’s New York headquarters. Putting our name on a promise that we know we can’t keep would be a disingenuous act, painting the Paris Agreement not as a serious undertaking, but as a global publicity stunt.” [39]

October 1, 2015

The Cato Institute's Walter Wilson published an article in Newsweek titled “Should Climate Change Deniers Be Prosecuted?” where he argues against calls for the government to investigate climate change skeptics under the federal racketeering law. [20]

Media Matters reports that Newsweek failed to disclose that the Cato Institute had received funding from the oil industry including ExxonMobil. [21]

“In the scientific community, there's universal agreement that neither bad weather nor changing climate mean very much to rich societies. It's the poor ones that can suffer greatly. Consequently, the best way to deal with weather and climate is with economic development.” [22]

This is just one of several articles the Cato Institute has published regarding Pope Francis and his encyclical on the environment. Other examples include:

According to Rahn, “The good news is that mankind will probably adapt to climate change just fine, as we have been adapting since the end of the Ice Age. New studies show that to date, the benefits of global warming have been greater than the costs, and are likely to remain so for many more decades.” [23]

The article was released three months before the commencement of COP 19 in Warsaw, Poland (November, 2013) and paints a picture of “internal inconsistency” within the IPCC's consensus on climate change. Releasing AR5, in its “current form,” The Cato Institute states, “[would] be a major fiasco.” [24]

April, 2009

Cato published an advertisement in major newspapers including the Washington Post,the New York Times, the Washington Times, and the Los Angeles Times that questioned President Obama's stance on climate change. [25]

Senior Fellow Patrick Michaels signed a letter to President Bush, asking him to withdraw the “Climate Action Report 2002.”

The letter demands it be rewritten based on “sound science” and recommends Bush “dismiss or re-assign all administration employees who are not pursuing your agenda, just as you have done in several similar instances.” [30]

Cato Handbooks: 1998 - 2009

The Cato Institute has created “Cato Handbooks” they distributed to members of Congress, many which included a chapter on Climate Change that discouraged U.S. involvement in the Kyoto Protocol:

According to the Cato Institute's book summary, “Acknowledging that industrial emissions of greenhouse gasses have warmed the planet and will continue to do so over the next several decades, Michaels and Balling argue that future warming will be moderate, not catastrophic, and will have benign economic and ecological effects.” [31]

October 6, 1999

Senior Fellow Patrick Michaels testified (PDF) before the House Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs, arguing against the classification of carbon dioxide as a pollutant. [32]

April 9, 1997

Jerry Taylor, Cato Director of Natural Resource Studies, testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Energy Research, Development, Production and Regulation and the House Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs.

He argued that the Clinton administration budget requests for global climate change programs were not in compliance with the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act. [33]

In another document, R.J. Reynolds Names the Cato Institute as a group they could rely on to “shift the debate and framework under which cigarette-related issues are evaluated in the future.”

They say to “Work with CATO Institute … to empanel a group to debate legality and future management of cigarette industry. Open forum to media (pitch C- SPAN coverage); issue press release and transcript of remarks to media not in attendance.” [36]

Cato Institute Contact & Address

Related Organizations

Mont Pelerin Society — Member. (At least 12 of the think tanks and institutes appearing on the list of US members of the Mont Pelerin Society have accepted money from one ore more Koch family foundations). [37]

"Fossil-fuel companies have spent millions funding anti-global-warming think tanks, purposely creating a climate of doubt around the science. DeSmogBlog is the antidote to that obfuscation." ~ BRYAN WALSH, TIME MAGAZINE